scholarly journals Exploring the impact of a brief mindfulness induction on motor inhibitory control

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satish Jaiswal ◽  
Shao-Yang Tsai ◽  
Chi-Hung Juan ◽  
Wei-Kuang Liang ◽  
Neil G. Muggleton
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Mindfulness Training ◽  
Mindfulness Practice ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Mindfulness Induction ◽  
Marginal Improvement ◽  
The Impact

AbstractInhibitory control can be divided into motor and cognitive inhibition. The current research is the first study exploring the impact of brief mindfulness training on motor inhibition, measured by a stop signal task in participants without any meditation experience. Motor inhibition performance was compared before and immediately after three different conditions; a brief mindfulness induction, a resting state and an active control session in which participants listened to their favorite music. Post-test learning effect on go-reaction times was seen for the resting and mindfulness conditions, but was absent in the music session, possibly due to emotional arousal might have led slower responses. Brief mindfulness training did not significantly alter inhibitory control, although marginal improvement in stop signal reaction time following the mindfulness induction was observed. Motor inhibition appears unresponsive to either short-term or long-term mindfulness practice. Future mindfulness studies should explore a broad spectrum of cognitive functions and populations.

scholarly journals Dynamical EEG Indices of Progressive Motor Inhibition and Error-Monitoring

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 478
Author(s):  
Trung Van Nguyen ◽  
Prasad Balachandran ◽  
Neil G. Muggleton ◽  
Wei-Kuang Liang ◽  
Chi-Hung Juan
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Control Process ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Error Processing ◽  
Alpha Power ◽  
Error Monitoring ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Hilbert Huang Transform ◽  
Time Frequency

Response inhibition has been widely explored using the stop signal paradigm in the laboratory setting. However, the mechanism that demarcates attentional capture from the motor inhibition process is still unclear. Error monitoring is also involved in the stop signal task. Error responses that do not complete, i.e., partial errors, may require different error monitoring mechanisms relative to an overt error. Thus, in this study, we included a “continue go” (Cont_Go) condition to the stop signal task to investigate the inhibitory control process. To establish the finer difference in error processing (partial vs. full unsuccessful stop (USST)), a grip-force device was used in tandem with electroencephalographic (EEG), and the time-frequency characteristics were computed with Hilbert–Huang transform (HHT). Relative to Cont_Go, HHT results reveal (1) an increased beta and low gamma power for successful stop trials, indicating an electrophysiological index of inhibitory control, (2) an enhanced theta and alpha power for full USST trials that may mirror error processing. Additionally, the higher theta and alpha power observed in partial over full USST trials around 100 ms before the response onset, indicating the early detection of error and the corresponding correction process. Together, this study extends our understanding of the finer motor inhibition control and its dynamic electrophysiological mechanisms.

Inhibitory Control Contributes to “Motor”- but not “Cognitive”- Impulsivity

2013 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 324-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Jane Caswell ◽  
Michael John Morgan ◽  
Theodora Duka
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Delay Of Gratification ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Impulsive Behavior ◽  
Generation Task ◽  
Motor Impulsivity

Literature on impulsivity regularly claims inhibitory control deficits underlie impulsive behavior. The current study investigated whether taxing inhibitory control will increase reflection (decision making under conditions of uncertainty), temporal (delay of gratification), and motor impulsivity (behavioral disinhibition). Inhibitory control was challenged, via a random letter generation task presented during responding to three impulsivity measures: the Information Sampling Task (IST), Single Key Impulsivity Paradigm, and the Stop Signal Task (SST). Participants (n = 33) were assigned to the inhibitory control challenging (experimental) condition, or to a control condition in which inhibitory control was not challenged. The SST was affected by the inhibitory control challenge: participants in the experimental condition displayed increased motor impulsivity, evidenced in longer stop signal reaction times (SSRTs) compared to the control group. The manipulation did not affect reflection- or temporal- impulsivity measures. These data support the suggestion that the mechanisms underlying the motor subtype of impulsivity are dissociable from the temporal and reflection subtypes, and that engagement of inhibitory control is not necessary to prevent impulsive decision making.

Inhibitory Control in Sexually Coercive Men: Behavioral Insights Using a Stop-Signal Task With Neutral, Emotional, and Erotic Stimuli

Sexual Abuse ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-319
Author(s):  
Fannie Carrier Emond ◽  
Kevin Nolet ◽  
Lucien Rochat ◽  
Joanne-Lucine Rouleau ◽  
Jean Gagnon
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Sexual Coercion ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Sexual Stimuli ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Erotic Stimuli ◽  
The Impact

Response inhibition is defined as one’s ability to voluntarily override an automatic or already initiated action when that action is inappropriate. Although a core mechanism of self-control, its association with sexual coercion perpetration and the impact of erotic cues on its exertion remain unknown. According to a domain-specific perspective on impulsivity, response inhibition performances should be disproportionately hindered by sexual cues in sexual coercion perpetrators. In total, 94 male college students completed a stop-signal task that included neutral, emotional, and erotic distracters. Results showed that men who reported past use of sexual coercion obtained overall poorer stop-signal task (SST) performances. Highly arousing sexual stimuli equally hindered the performances of perpetrators and non-perpetrators, whereas moderately arousing sexual and nonsexual positive stimuli did not significantly affect performances. Results do not support a domain-specific perspective on the link between response inhibition and sexual coercion, but rather suggest generally poorer inhibitory control among sexual coercion perpetrators.

scholarly journals Leveling the Field for a Fairer Race between Going and Stopping: Neural Evidence for the Race Model of Motor Inhibition from a New Version of the Stop Signal Task

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 590-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobin Dykstra ◽  
Darcy A. Waller ◽  
Eliot Hazeltine ◽  
Jan R. Wessel
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Model ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Race Model ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Neural Process ◽  
Processing Demands ◽  
Inhibition Process

The stop signal task (SST) is the gold standard experimental model of inhibitory control. However, neither SST condition–contrast (stop vs. go, successful vs. failed stop) purely operationalizes inhibition. Because stop trials include a second, infrequent signal, the stop versus go contrast confounds inhibition with attentional and stimulus processing demands. While this confound is controlled for in the successful versus failed stop contrast, the go process is systematically faster on failed stop trials, contaminating the contrast with a different noninhibitory confound. Here, we present an SST variant to address both confounds and evaluate putative neural indices of inhibition with these influences removed. In our variant, stop signals occurred on every trial, equating the noninhibitory demands of the stop versus go contrast. To entice participants to respond despite the impending stop signals, responses produced before stop signals were rewarded. This also reversed the go process bias that typically affects the successful versus failed stop contrast. We recorded scalp electroencephalography in this new version of the task (as well as a standard version of the SST with infrequent stop signal) and found that, even under these conditions, the properties of the frontocentral stop signal P3 ERP remained consistent with the race model. Specifically, in both tasks, the amplitude of the P3 was increased on stop versus go trials. Moreover, the onset of this P3 occurred earlier for successful compared with failed stop trials in both tasks, consistent with the proposal of the race model that an earlier start of the inhibition process will increase stopping success. Therefore, the frontocentral stop signal P3 represents a neural process whose properties are in line with the predictions of the race model of motor inhibition, even when the SST's confounds are controlled.

scholarly journals Inhibitory Control Deficits in Overweight Participants are Preserved in a Gamified Stop-Signal Task (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Alexander Schroeder ◽  
Johannes Lohmann ◽  
Manuel Ninaus
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Color Tone ◽  
Behavioral Deficits ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Measures Of Performance

BACKGROUND Gamification in mental health could increase training adherence, motivation, and transfer effects, but the external validity of gamified tasks is unclear. The present study documents that gamified task variants can show preserved associations between markers of behavioral deficits and health-related variables. We draw on the inhibitory control deficit in overweight populations to investigate effects of gamification on performance measures in a web-based experimental task. OBJECTIVE This study tested whether associations between inhibitory control and overweight were preserved in a gamified stop-signal task (SST). METHODS Two versions of an adaptive SST were developed and tested in an online experiment. Participants (n=111) were randomized to one of the two task variants and completed a series of questionnaires along with either the gamified SST or a conventional SST. Both variants drew on the identical core mechanics but the gamified variant included an additional narrative, graphical theme, scoring system with visual and emotional feedback, and the presence of a companion character. In both tasks, food and neutral low-poly stimuli had to be classified based on their color tone (go trials), but responses had to be withheld in 25% of the trials (stop-trials). Mean go reaction times and stop signal reaction times (SSRT) were analyzed as measures of performance and inhibitory control. RESULTS Participants in the gamified SST had longer reaction times (803±179 ms vs. 607±90 ms) and worse inhibitory control (SSRT: 383±109 ms vs. 297±45 ms). The association of BMI with inhibitory control was relatively small (r=.155, 95%-CI: .013-.290). Overweight participants had longer reaction times (752±217 ms vs. 672±137 ms) and SSRTs (363±116 ms vs. 326±77 ms). Gamification did not interact with the effect of overweight on mean performance or inhibitory control. There were no effects of gamification on mood and user experience, despite a negative effect on perceived efficiency. CONCLUSIONS The detrimental effects of heightened body-mass index on inhibitory control were preserved in a gamified version of the stop signal task. Overall the effects of overweight were smaller than in previously published web-based and laboratory studies. Gamification elements can impact behavioral performance, but gamified tasks can still assess inhibitory control deficits. Although our results are promising, according validations may differ for other types of behavior, gamification, and health variables.

scholarly journals Generalised inhibitory impairment to appetitive cues: From alcoholic to non-alcoholic visual stimuli

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Monk ◽  
Adam Qureshi ◽  
Charlotte Rebecca Pennington ◽  
Iain Hamlin
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Research Methodologies ◽  
Appetitive Stimuli ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Appetitive Cues

BackgroundPrior research demonstrates that individuals who consume alcohol show diminished inhibitory control towards alcohol-related cues. However, such research contrasts predominantly alcoholic appetitive cues with non-alcoholic, non-appetitive cues (e.g., stationary items). As such, it is not clear whether it is specifically the alcoholic nature of the cues that influences impairments in inhibitory control or whether more general appetitive processes are at play.AimsThe current study examined the hitherto untested assertion that the disinhibiting effects of alcohol-related stimuli might generalise to other appetitive liquid stimuli, but not to non-appetitive liquid stimuli.MethodFifty-nine participants (Mage = 21.63, SD = 5.85) completed a modified version of the Stop Signal Task, which exposed them to visual stimuli of three types of liquids: Alcoholic appetitive (e.g., wine), non-alcoholic appetitive (e.g., water) and non-appetitive (e.g., washing-up liquid).ResultsConsistent with predictions, Stop-signal reaction time was significantly longer for appetitive (alcoholic, non-alcoholic) compared to non-appetitive stimuli. Participants were also faster and less error-prone when responding to appetitive relative to non-appetitive stimuli on go-trials. There were no apparent differences in stop signal reaction times between alcoholic and non-alcoholic appetitive products.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that decreases in inhibitory control in response to alcohol-related cues might generalise to other appetitive liquids, possibly due to evaluative conditioning. Implications for existing research methodologies include the use of appetitive control conditions and the diversification of cues within tests of alcohol-related inhibitory control.

scholarly journals To Go or Not to Go: Degrees of Dynamic Inhibitory Control Revealed by the Function of Grip Force and Early Electrophysiological Indices

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trung Van Nguyen ◽  
Che-Yi Hsu ◽  
Satish Jaiswal ◽  
Neil G. Muggleton ◽  
Wei-Kuang Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Error Correction ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Force Measurement ◽  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Source Analysis ◽  
Motor Inhibition

A critical issue in executive control is how the nervous system exerts flexibility to inhibit a prepotent response and adapt to sudden changes in the environment. In this study, force measurement was used to capture “partial” unsuccessful trials that are highly relevant in extending the current understanding of motor inhibition processing. Moreover, a modified version of the stop-signal task was used to control and eliminate potential attentional capture effects from the motor inhibition index. The results illustrate that the non-canceled force and force rate increased as a function of stop-signal delay (SSD), offering new objective indices for gauging the dynamic inhibitory process. Motor response (time and force) was a function of delay in the presentation of novel/infrequent stimuli. A larger lateralized readiness potential (LRP) amplitude in go and novel stimuli indicated an influence of the novel stimuli on central motor processing. Moreover, an early N1 component reflects an index of motor inhibition in addition to the N2 component reported in previous studies. Source analysis revealed that the activation of N2 originated from inhibitory control associated areas: the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG), pre-motor cortex, and primary motor cortex. Regarding partial responses, LRP and error-related negativity (ERNs) were associated with error correction processes, whereas the N2 component may indicate the functional overlap between inhibition and error correction. In sum, the present study has developed reliable and objective indices of motor inhibition by introducing force, force-rate and electrophysiological measures, further elucidating our understandings of dynamic motor inhibition and error correction.

scholarly journals Is motor inhibition involved in the processing of sentential negation? An assessment via the Stop-Signal Task

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Montalti ◽  
Marta Calbi ◽  
Valentina Cuccio ◽  
Maria Alessandra Umiltà ◽  
Vittorio Gallese
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Good Tool ◽  
Scientific Debate ◽  
Sentential Negation ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Methodological Considerations

AbstractIn the last decades, the embodied approach to cognition and language gained momentum in the scientific debate, leading to evidence in different aspects of language processing. However, while the bodily grounding of concrete concepts seems to be relatively not controversial, abstract aspects, like the negation logical operator, are still today one of the main challenges for this research paradigm. In this framework, the present study has a twofold aim: (1) to assess whether mechanisms for motor inhibition underpin the processing of sentential negation, thus, providing evidence for a bodily grounding of this logic operator, (2) to determine whether the Stop-Signal Task, which has been used to investigate motor inhibition, could represent a good tool to explore this issue. Twenty-three participants were recruited in this experiment. Ten hand-action-related sentences, both in affirmative and negative polarity, were presented on a screen. Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible to the direction of the Go Stimulus (an arrow) and to withhold their response when they heard a sound following the arrow. This paradigm allows estimating the Stop Signal Reaction Time (SSRT), a covert reaction time underlying the inhibitory process. Our results show that the SSRT measured after reading negative sentences are longer than after reading affirmative ones, highlighting the recruitment of inhibitory mechanisms while processing negative sentences. Furthermore, our methodological considerations suggest that the Stop-Signal Task is a good paradigm to assess motor inhibition’s role in the processing of sentence negation.

scholarly journals Effect of obesity on inhibitory control in preadolescents during stop-signal task. An event-related potentials study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graciela C. Alatorre-Cruz ◽  
Heather Downs ◽  
Darcy Hagood ◽  
Seth T. Sorensen ◽  
D. Keith Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Related Potentials

scholarly journals S76. PROACTIVE AND REACTIVE RESPONSE INHIBITION IN INDIVIDUAL WITH SCHIZOTYPY: AN ERP STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S63-S63
Author(s):  
Ya Wang ◽  
Lu-xia Jia ◽  
Xiao-jing Qin ◽  
Jun-yan Ye ◽  
Raymond Chan
Keyword(s):  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Proactive Inhibition ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Present Event

Abstract Background Schizotypy, a subclinical group at risk for schizophrenia, have been found to show impairments in response inhibition. Recent studies differentiated proactive inhibition (a preparatory process before the stimuli appears) and reactive inhibition (the inhibition of a pre-potent or already initiated response). However, it remains unclear whether both proactive and reactive inhibition are impaired in schizotypy and what are the neural mechanisms. The present event-related potential study used an adapted stop-signal task to examine the two inhibition processes and the underlying neural mechanisms in schizotypy compared to healthy controls (HC). Methods A total of 21 individuals with schizotypy and 25 matched HC participated in this study. To explore different degrees of proactive inhibition, we set three conditions: a “certain” go condition which no stop signal occurred, a “17% no go” condition in which stop signal would appear in 17% of trials, and a “33% no go” condition in which stop signal would appear in 33% of trials. All participants completed all the conditions, and EEG was recorded when participants completed the task. Results Behavioral results showed that in both schizotypy and HC, the reaction times (RT) of go trials were significantly prolonged as the no go percentage increased, and HC showed significantly longer go RT compared with schizotypy in both “17% no go” and “33% no go” conditions, suggesting greater proactive inhibition in HC. Stop signal reaction times (SSRTs) in “33% no go” condition was shorter than “17% no go” condition in both groups. Schizotypy showed significantly longer SSRTs in both “17% no go” and “33% no go” conditions than HC, indicating schizotypy relied more on reactive inhibition. ERP results showed that schizotypy showed larger overall N1 for go trials than HC irrespective of condition, which may indicate a compensation process in schizotypy. Schizotypy showed smaller N2 on both successful and unsuccessful stop trials in “17% no go” conditions than HC, while no group difference was found in “33% no go” conditions for stop trials, which may indicate impaired error processing. Discussion These results suggested that schizotypy tended to be impaired in both proactive control and reactive control processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document